Loading...
030607 planning commission CITY OF NEW HOPE 4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 6, 2007 City Hall, 7 p.m. CALL TO ORDER The New Hope Planning Commission met in regular session pursuant to due call and notice thereof; Chair Hemken called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Paul Anderson, Tim Buggy, Pat Crough, Kathi Hemken, Jeff Houle, Roger Landy, Ranjan Nirgudé, Bill Oelkers, Tom Schmidt (arrived 7:01), Steve Svendsen Absent: Jim Brinkman Also Present: Kirk McDonald, Director of Community Development, Curtis Jacobsen, Community Development Specialist, Kim Berggren, Community Development Assistant, Alan Brixius, Planning Consultant, Steve Sondrall, City Attorney, Vince Vander Top, City Engineer, Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary CONSENT BUSINESS There was no Consent Business on the agenda. PUBLIC HEARING PC07-01 Chair Hemken introduced for discussion Item 4.1, request for preliminary plat for a 17-lot, single-family subdivision and planned unit development Item 4.1 (PUD) to allow for flexibility regarding lot width requirements of city code, south of 52nd Avenue and between Pennsylvania and Louisiana avenues, Avalon Homes, petitioner. This application was tabled at the February 6 meeting so the developer could provide additional information. Mr. Curtis Jacobsen stated that the petitioner was requesting preliminary plat review for a 17-lot, single family subdivision and a planned unit development to allow for flexibility regarding lot width requirements of the city code. The site is zoned R-1, single family residential. Adjacent land uses are single family to the north, open space to the west, the railroad tracks and industrial properties to the south, and the city of Crystal and park land to the east. The site contains 7.97 acres. Lot area ratios include: right-of-way and paved area 34 percent, house pads 16 percent and green area 50 percent. The Comprehensive Plan encouraged a low density residential development for this area. The utilities would be built by the developer at the developer’s expense. The site grade drops 26 feet from west to east. The city has had many proposals for this site throughout the years. Most recently was in 2005, which lead to this application. The City Council previously selected Avalon Homes as the preferred developer through a competitive process in 2006. Mr. Jacobsen stated that Avalon Homes prepared a preliminary plat that proposed the creation of 17 single family residential lots fronting on Prairie Ridge Drive on the south side of the site. There are two elevation rises on the site, a knob on the western portion of the site and a berm on the northern portion of the site, adjacent to the Crystal properties. The berm has approximately a 10-foot rise and is heavily wooded. The depth of the lots allows for retention of the northern berm and the trees on the berm, which should block any sight lines between the rear of the Crystal properties and the new development. The developer proposed lot widths from 68 feet to 91 feet and lot depths of 134 feet to 216 feet. The proposed price range would be from $320,000 to $390,000. Housing styles would include ramblers, two story, modified two story, and split style with square footages to match the proposed price ranges. Three-car garages would be encouraged. The homes would have a minimum 6/12 roof pitch, and exteriors would be constructed with stone/brick/stucco/cement board and/or vinyl siding. All lots would be landscaped to city standards. An architectural committee would review house plans to be sure all houses are constructed with a different plan. If approved, the anticipated project schedule would be for a spring 2007 construction start up with complete build out within two years. A sidewalk was proposed along the south side of the roadway and a 10- foot paved trail would be located between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 toward the undeveloped land to the west of the project. Property owners within 350 feet of the site were mailed a legal notice and a project bulletin was also mailed to area residents, including the city of Crystal for the February public hearing. The city of Crystal was sent a full set of project plans. Six area residents spoke at the public hearing in February. A second notice was mailed to area residents informing them of this meeting. The proposed development is consistent with the city’s Comprehensive Plan. Through flexibility afforded by the planned unit development regulations, the developer would be able to meet the subdivision and platting standards of the city. The proposal complied with the city’s intent and purpose for a PUD. The developer would be required to enter into a site improvement agreement with the city prior to the filing of the final plat. All of the lots in the subdivision would be larger than the city’s 9,500 square foot minimum standard. All setback requirements comply with the code. Flexibility would be required for lot width only. Rear yard storm water drainage was identified on the plans. A storm water pipe runs from north to south through the site between Lots 4 and 5 and storm water drainage would run through the rear yards of Lots 5 through 15. Two rain water gardens are located on the site, one at the south center along the roadway and another in the rear yards of Lots 14 and 15. Staff and the Design and Review Committee met with the developers in February and discussed storm water drainage and the comments received at the February public hearing. The developer responded to all comments. 2 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 Per the city’s direction, the developer revised plans to show a lift station to be incorporated into the design of the sanitary sewer. The revised utility plan indicated the location of the proposed lift station, pipe drainage and emergency overflow area. Revised landscaping plans indicated one tree per lot as requested by the Design and Review Committee. The pin oak trees in the rear yards have been replaced by pine trees. Landscaping along the railroad tracks has been intensified. A silt fence was added to protect the trees in the rear yards of Lots 3 through 6. The healthy trees along the berm would also be protected during the construction process. Mr. Jacobsen summarized by saying the developer proposed a 17-lot subdivision on the city-owned property. Although the lots are larger than city requirements, PUD standards needed to be implemented to accommodate the smaller lot widths. Mr. Jacobsen stated that staff was recommending approval subject to the conditions in the staff memo dated February 28. Commissioner Schmidt questioned whether the proposed lift station would be above or below ground and Mr. Jacobsen stated it would be below ground, with only the control panel above ground. Commissioner Crough wondered whether the city would receive written approval from the city of Crystal for the use of its sanitary sewer system. Mr. Jacobsen stated that the city engineer and Public Works Department were working with the city of Crystal to resolve the connections along the eastern boundary of the project. The road and water would be the only connections with Crystal. The sanitary sewer and storm sewer would not go toward Crystal. A question was raised as to why these connections had not yet been resolved. Mr. Vince Vander Top, city engineer, stated that plans had been sent to Crystal’s city engineer and some discussion had taken place regarding the street and fence connection by the ballfields at Iron Horse Park. Nothing had been received in writing. Houle wondered whether or not Crystal may raise any items that would be a stumbling block for this project. Mr. Vander Top stated that Crystal’s engineer indicated it would not be in a position to pay for any improvements. Vander Top stressed that New Hope did not expect Crystal to pay for the improvements. When a gravity sewer connection was being considered, which would have disturbed a portion of Louisiana Avenue located in Crystal, those costs would have been borne by the developer. The lift station now proposed would not affect Louisiana Avenue. The storm water would be directed to the ditch along the railroad and not toward Crystal. The water main connection would be at the city border, as are several other connections throughout the city. A question was raised as to where water from Iron Horse Park drained and Mr. Vander Top stated he expected some of that water would drain to the railroad ditch, but he was not positive. Water flowing to the ditch would travel to the east to a culvert crossing. Some of the water from the development would flow to the existing storm sewer and utilize 3 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 the culvert crossing on the western end of the property. The future drainage pattern would be similar to the current drainage. Mr. Vander Top stated that the rate of runoff would be limited to predevelopment conditions. Therefore, the rain gardens and infiltration would not only infiltrate water into the ground, but it would hold the water back and release it at predevelopment rates. Commissioner Oelkers initiated discussion on the soil borings. Mr. Vander Top indicated that testing showed some variation of the soils from west to east. Soil borings taken in the rain garden area indicate sandy soils six feet below the proposed bottom elevation. Soil boring columns indicated that there was no water present, which indicated that ground water would not be encountered on the site. At the time the soil borings were taken, staff did not know a lift station would be constructed, therefore, the soil borings taken in the area of the lift station did not go as deep as the bottom of the lift station. Some ground water may be encountered in that area, but with the results of other soil borings, there should not be a problem even at that depth. The soil borings on the western end of the project did indicate more clay soils. The history of the site was indicated in the soil borings, including the fill placed on the site years ago when Winnetka Avenue was reconstructed. When the roadway and house foundations are constructed with the project, it would be important that infrastructure not be placed on this “filled” area. Oelkers confirmed that the project would not change the rate of water leaving the site. Mr. Vander Top reiterated that even though the soils are good for infiltration in the rain gardens, overflows would be built into the project so that, in the case of a large rain event, when the rain gardens fill up, the water would overflow in a way not to impact the new properties or the existing properties to the north. A question was raised as to how the cost of the roadway would be impacted by the soils in areas fill was placed. Mr. Vander Top confirmed that there may be some increased cost. The city would be conducting inspections during the construction of the street and, the developer understood, that if unstable soils would be encountered, the soils would need to be excavated and replaced with stable materials. Any costs of the development are the responsibility of the developer. Mr. Sondrall, city attorney, added that typically all costs are incurred by the developer, however, some items could be open for discussion and negotiation with the city. Mr. Vander Top recommended that the costs be borne by the developer. Mr. Brian Bourassa with MFRA Engineering, representing Avalon Homes, came forward to address the Commission. He stated that they had tried to address all concerns of the Commission raised at the February Planning Commission meeting as well as comments from the Design and Review Committee. He reported that he met with Mrs. Weeks, 5206 Oregon Avenue, to address her concerns regarding grading and trees. His firm coordinated on the soil borings, house plans, and addressed design issues. 4 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 Mr. Bourassa added that the model home would be located on one of the western lots. Commissioner Svendsen commented that the Design and Review Committee requested that pine trees replace the oak trees along Lots 3 through 6 at the northern border. Additional trees would be placed along the railroad tracks. Due to the fact that the public hearing was closed after comments were taken at the February meeting, motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen, to open the public hearing on Planning Case 07-01. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Chair Hemken inquired if anyone in the audience wished to address the Commission. Mr. Michael Stockinger, 7133 52nd Avenue North, Crystal, stated he addressed the Commission in February and expressed concern that he still had not received any assurances that the burden of the development would not go beyond additional traffic and noise, such as water in his yard and basement. He stated he sent letters to all members of the City Council and only had one member acknowledge his letter, which he stated he felt did not build trust. He also tried to contact the developer and did not hear from anyone. He wondered what would happen if the model home did not sell in a timely manner and construction continued over several years rather than the two year time frame as proposed. He did not want construction to go on forever. Mr. Stockinger questioned the accuracy of the soil borings due to the fact that the last few years have been drier than normal. He stated he acknowledged that due diligence had been done since the last meeting. He maintained that if the city and developer were sure no future problems would occur, he should be given some assurances that if a problem did occur, someone would be held accountable. He stated he felt it would be ridiculous for the project to move forward if he could not be given a guarantee. Commissioner Crough asked whether Mr. Stockinger had water in his basement and why he thought he would have once construction began. Mr. Stockinger replied he did not have water in his basement at this time and hoped he would not in the future. He did not feel it should be his financial burden if there ever was a problem. Ms. Evelyn Weeks, 5206 Oregon Avenue North, New Hope, stated that in February several commissioners suggested that the developer meet with her to discuss her concerns with regard to grading and trees. Mr. Bourassa and Mr. Jacobsen met with her and discussed all her concerns. She stated that both men were very courteous, which she appreciated, and she was satisfied. Ms. Teresa Chapman, 5249 Louisiana Avenue, Crystal, came forward. She requested clarification that the sanitary sewer and storm sewer would not be connected to the Crystal system and that the street would not be 5 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 disturbed. She questioned what would happen if the lift station did not work properly. There was no one else in the audience to address the Commission. Commissioner Schmidt recognized Mr. Stockinger’s frustration that council members had not acknowledged his correspondence to them and indicated that two council members were in attendance. Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner Buggy, to close the public hearing on Planning Case 07-01. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Mr. Vander Top explained that there was no reflection of water in the soil boring columns. He stated that the water table does fluctuate by season and by whether or not there had been a large amount of rainfall. An expert in this field can look at soil boring columns and determine the history of the soil by discoloration of the soil and other factors. None of those things were noted in the borings. He stated the sandy soils on the east edge of this development are much the same as the sandy soils in Crystal. Vander Top added that in recent inflow/infiltration studies that New Hope has an I/I issue with its sanitary sewer system. Crystal does not, which is reflective of its sandy soils, lower ground water and higher infiltration. In response to the inquiry if the lift station did not work, Vander Top explained it could be a problem for the 10 properties upstream of the lift station, and would not impact any homes outside of the development. It is expected there would be a very low flow from the 10 homes and the lift station would be oversized to provide emergency capacity. There would be a SCADA system on the lift station so an alarm would go off at Public Works. There would be two pumps in the lift station, as there are in the other lift stations in the city, and only one would be required to meet the demands of the flow. If the power would go out, Public Works utilizes a generator to run the pumps until power is restored. Commissioner Nirgudé confirmed that lift stations and the monitoring/ maintenance were part of the normal operations of the city. Mr. Vander Top reiterated that all of the lift stations in New Hope have two pumps. One was adequate, but standard practice was to have a back up pump. Under normal operation of the lift stations, the pumps alternate hour by hour to be sure they both stay in operation and wear evenly. Commissioner Crough stated that the water table was an act of God and no one could control it. He added that Devil’s Lake, North Dakota, had been a dry alkali bed and has now risen 26 feet in the last few years and is flooding the surrounding area. Mr. Bourassa addressed the concern of homes not selling. He stated that Avalon Homes would probably not continue building homes if they did not have buyers. The vacant property would be maintained until such 6 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 time as it was built out. Commissioner Houle questioned whether or not a high water mark had been determined. Mr. Bourassa stated that there was no indication in the soil borings of any ground water to the depth of the soil borings, which was 15 feet. Mr. Stockinger reiterated that if the houses do not sell the city would not receive any property taxes as proposed. The proposal was to construct homes over a two-year period. He was concerned that construction could continue for several years. The draft agreement included in the planning packet indicating a timeframe until 2010. It was noted that agreement was an interim agreement to work exclusively with Avalon Homes on the project. The development agreement, which is a condition of approval, would lay out conditions of approval of the project and be drafted after Council approval. Mr. Sondrall stated that the request by Mr. Stockinger to have assurances that he would not have water in his basement due to this development was not, in his opinion, a reasonable request. When someone purchases a property, they are free to use the property in accordance with the zoning ordinances and building codes of the city. It was not incumbent upon the property owner to assure adjacent property owners that they would never experience any type of problem from the development. There could be many different reasons that a particular property could experience problems, such as acts of God, other neighbors planting landscaping that changes drainage patterns, and so on. If cities required developers or other property owners to provide assurances that there would never be any problems, no one would give those assurances and no properties would be developed. Commissioner Svendsen reiterated that the development was designed with rain gardens and overflow areas, engineering documents indicated that water would not be directed toward Crystal, and the water that moved around the property would be no greater than in the past. Mr. Sondrall added that a property owner could not utilize his property in a negligent fashion that would cause damage to an adjacent property. Grading, building and engineering requirements, along with zoning and building codes, are the only assurances that the city could provide that the project would be constructed correctly. Mr. McDonald added that the city tried to assure that projects were built according to submitted plans. This was accomplished through a development agreement, a performance bond, and professional inspections to make sure that the project was built correctly. Commissioner Oelkers commented that the build out of the site would be determined by the economy. The city could not expect the developer would construct all of the houses within the two year timeframe and leave 7 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 several houses sit vacant. Mr. McDonald interjected that this project was similar to the Hillside Terrace project, and there was no timeline placed on that project. Oelkers added that four of the seven Hillside Terrace lots have been sold in two years. Mr. Sondrall added that if the market did not permit the developer to sell the properties, he would have to leave the land vacant or resell the property to someone else. It was expected that Avalon Homes would have completed a market study to determine the sale-ability of the properties. Commissioner Houle suggested that design guidelines be implemented for the development and change the language in the development agreement to reflect specific building materials, including stone or brick on the front elevations. Mr. Jacobsen stated that the final documents would be drafted by the city attorney upon approval of the project. Direction could possibly be given to the developer on the type of building materials to be utilized for the exterior of the homes and included as a condition of approval. Avalon Homes’ intention was to not build spec houses, other than the model, with the buyers choosing their own building materials. Commissioner Houle stressed the fact that unless the design guidelines were spelled out exactly, he stated he felt everything else was just talk. Commissioner Oelkers concurred and stated that a percentage of stone or brick, etc. should be specified in the development agreement. He stated that there were many options for exterior building materials. Developments in other cities specify exactly what types of materials could be utilized. Oelkers pointed out that the Planning Commission makes recommendations to the City Council, but the Council makes the final decision. MOTION Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner Landy, Item 4.1 to approve Planning Case 07-01, request for preliminary plat for a 17-lot, single-family subdivision and planned unit development (PUD) to allow for flexibility regarding lot width requirements of city code, south of 52nd Avenue and between Pennsylvania and Louisiana avenues, Avalon Homes, petitioner, subject to the following conditions: 1.Applicant shall enter into a development agreement (prepared by the city attorney) and post a performance bond (amount to be determined by city engineer and building official) with the city to insure compliance of the approved plans. 2.Comply with city engineer recommendations including approval by Shingle Creek Watershed Commission. 3.Approval of plans by building official. 4.Comply with city attorney plat recommendations. 5.Developer to contribute funds that were to be expended toward Crystal sewer connection towards lift station costs. 6.Applicant to pay $25,500 park dedication fee. 7.Comply with the following planner’s recommendations: A.Demarcation posts are installed at the edge of the rain garden 8 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 easement in Lots 14 and 15, Block 2, with signage to discourage trespass into the rain garden area. B.The trail between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, shall be placed in a trail easement. The width of the trail easement shall be 20 feet. The PUD shall require a side yard setback of 10/5 feet from the edge of the trail easement. The trail shall be constructed prior to the homes being built on these lots. C.Installation of the street lights shall be a development expense. Final street lighting plans shall be subject to city approval. D.Applicant shall provide one 2 1/2-inch caliper shade tree per lot located in the front yard. E.The fence on the south edge of the plat shall be connected to the park fence in Crystal to discourage pedestrians crossing the railroad tracks. 8.The homes constructed shall comply with the terms in the purchase and development agreement. 9.Planning Commission to waive review of the final plat. 10. Twenty percent of brick or stone on front elevation, exclusive of doors and windows. A suggestion was made that if Avalon Homes wanted to vary the home design, it would need to come before the City Council for approval. Mr. Bourassa stated he felt it was a good idea to specify a percentage of brick or stone on the front elevation in the developers agreement. Mr. Brixius added that an adjustment could be made at the City Council meeting, if needed. It would be better to state a percentage rather than give a specific height requirement to allow for some flexibility in design. Commissioner Houle suggested that the Planning Commission review the purchase agreement prior to City Council approval, due to the fact that the Commission was suggesting specific items for the development. He stated he felt it was the Commission’s role as a technical body to review the purchase agreement and offer suggestions and recommendations to avoid pitfalls. Commissioner Svendsen disagreed due to the fact that the development agreement was beyond the role of the Planning Commission. The Commission’s role was to review the project to see if it met the zoning ordinance. Voting in favor: Anderson, Buggy, Crough, Hemken, Landy, Nirgudé, Schmidt, Svendsen Voting against: Houle, Oelkers Absent: Brinkman Motion carried. Chair Hemken stated this request would be considered by the City Council on March 26 and asked the petitioner to be in attendance. Commissioner Houle offered a motion for the benefit of the council members to gain commissioner’s opinions on the use of this property as 9 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 put forth for 17 single family lots. Motion Motion by Commissioner Houle, seconded by Commissioner Oelkers, for Item 4.1 no confidence in the use of this property for 17 single family lots. Commissioner Oelkers stated he felt a better use of the property would be as higher density. He felt the Council was giving the property away at too low a price, due to the fact that the city now would need to construct a lift station for approximately $100,000. The allocation of dollars would be better spent for 40 units rather than 17 units. Commissioner Houle concurred. Houle stated he felt the proposal was not very imaginative. A better proposal for the property should be found, whether it is for this density or a higher density. Home values at $350,000 may be move up housing for some residents. The city has one opportunity to have this property developed and he wondered if this was the best there was. Commissioner Schmidt wondered whether there were any other high density proposals considered. Mr. Jacobsen explained that the City Council went through a Request for Qualification/Request for Proposal process nearly six months ago. Two proposals were received, one from Avalon Homes for a 15-lot subdivision and another proposal by Peter Long for a 32-unit bay home concept, slab-on-grade proposal. The City Council chose the Avalon Homes development team to develop the land on behalf of the city. The Council was not supportive of the higher density development. The property is zoned R-1 and could have a higher density, however, due to the large elevation difference, the property is a difficult parcel to develop. The Council previously indicated it wanted single family homes. Voting in favor: Buggy, Houle, Oelkers Voting against: Anderson, Crough, Hemken ,Landy, Nirgudé, Schmidt, Svendsen Absent: Brinkman Motion carried. PC06-15 Chair Hemken introduced for discussion Item 4.2, review and approval of Design Guidelines, city of New Hope, petitioner. Item 4.2 Commissioner Houle explained that the intent of the guidelines was to facilitate a conversation among developers, property owners, and the city. The city did not want to dictate specific terms or requirements, but give latitude to developers and owners. The city desired to establish common design guidelines to protect property values and possibly give New Hope residents a voice in some of the decisions that affect the community. The guidelines would be applicable to remodeling or expansion projects for commercial, industrial and multiple family properties of three or more units. The guidelines would not apply to single and two family properties. The design guidelines would be applicable to remodeling projects or additions. The guidelines would be applied to the new addition only, not 10 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 the existing building. City staff, with the assistance of the Design and Review Committee, when appropriate, would review projects where less than 25 percent of the existing building area was affected. If a project was more substantial, the project would be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council. Ms. Berggren interjected that the current language of the design guidelines states that any exterior changes would require compliance with the guidelines. Mr. Brixius added that the design guidelines were intended to be guidelines and made a part of the Comprehensive Plan, not an ordinance. The guidelines would attempt to achieve a sense of place to the commercial areas of the city. In the future, staff would bring forward ordinance amendments to allow greater flexibility in building placement and orientation. In the metropolitan area, cities can enforce portions of the Comprehensive Plan, which carries equal strength to the zoning ordinance, but the Comprehensive Plan does not carry specific laws that require variance processes for changes. The design guidelines capture the overall design theme for the community. Houle stated that after Planning Commission approval, the Design Guidelines would be presented to the Council at the work session in March. Commissioner Anderson stated that he was concerned with the language relating to review by staff and the Design and Review Committee for repainting of buildings. That requirement would require property owners to provide staff with full sets of plans, at great expense, and Anderson stated he was not in favor of dictating paint color. Many new developments in neighboring cities all looked the same to him, and he was in favor of adding more primary colors to developments to make them more vibrant and inviting to the public. Commissioner Nirgudé stated he was open to more color and the change should be incorporated into this document. Commissioner Houle indicated the building color section on page 10 was taken from other cities’ documents in the metropolitan area and he agreed that there would not be much variety as it was written. He suggested more latitude with this section. The review committee was agreeable to this language. He stated that the design guidelines could be approved with the condition that page 10 be revised to open up the color selection. The document should be revised prior to the Council work session on March 19. MOTION Motion by Oelkers, seconded by Landy, to approve the design Item 4.2 guidelines. No vote taken. Motion withdrawn. Upon further discussion, Commissioner Oelkers mentioned that he was not in agreement with the guidelines dictating the repainting of buildings. 11 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 Motion by Commissioner Houle, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen, to approve Planning Case 06-15, approval of Design Guidelines, city of New Hope, petitioner, subject to revising the verbiage under building colors on page 10 to “vibrant and primary color options are acceptable as determined to be appropriate for the site through the Design and Review process.” Commissioner Schmidt initiated discussion on whether or not a business had to obtain approval prior to repainting its building. Voting in favor: Anderson, Buggy, Crough, Hemken ,Houle, Landy, Nirgudé, Oelkers, Schmidt, Svendsen Voting against: None Absent: Brinkman Motion carried. Terra Linda Drainage Mr. Vander Top reported on drainage in the Terra Linda area of the city, located along Terra Linda Drive just east of Winnetka Avenue and north Report of Medicine Lake Road. He explained that during a storm in May 2006, an intense rain occurred in this area which resulted in flooding in the area, including several homes north of Terra Linda Drive and an apartment building on Rosalyn Court. Vander Top explained where the overland flows drained and storm sewer drainage. Last year, the City Council requested information on past flooding occurrences, potential improvements in the area, and costs of the improvements. Staff has now met with representatives of the watershed, the cities of Crystal, and Golden Valley and will take revised information to the Council in March. Vander Top explained that any options for improvements would be difficult, and the Bassett Creek Watershed would most likely need to be involved in any solution to the flooding problem. Design and Review Commissioner Svendsen reported that the Design and Review Committee met in February with the petitioners and a resident who wanted to build Committee an addition over an easement. McDonald reported that staff had met with Item 5.1 another resident desiring to construct a large addition, and an application may be submitted for the April meeting. Staff would contact the committee if a meeting was necessary. Mr. Sondrall confirmed that a structure could not be constructed over a drainage and utility easement; the easement would have to be vacated. Codes and Standards Chair Hemken stated that the Codes and Standards Committee had met on February 21 to discuss several minor ordinance amendments. The next Committee meeting would be held on April 11, at 7:30 a.m. Item 5.2 Comprehensive Plan Commissioner Houle reported that the committee met on February 22 and discussed policy statements and comments from the open houses. The Update Subcommittee next meeting would be held on April 19. The City Council would be Item 5.3 updated on the status of the Comprehensive Plan at its work session on March 19, and several committee members would be attending the work 12 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007 session. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. Miscellaneous Issues NEW BUSINESS Motion to Approve Motion was made by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner Minutes Svendsen, to approve the Planning Commission minutes of February 6, 2007. All voted in favor. Motion carried. ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no other announcements. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 9:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary 13 Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007